When we hear the word “literacy”, I usually think of it as the ability to read and write. Digital literacy takes that foundation and creates in own world – the online world- where the ability to understand, use, and create in digital spaces becomes essential. It may not always be simple; you might need to understand coding, edit a video, or figure out why your WiFi is betraying you. I know for one that remembering complicated passwords is something that I constantly struggle with.
Eyman dives into the debate by asking, “Is one of the relationships: how do we define digital literacy (in both functional and critical terms) and how does it impact the field of digital rhetoric?” He warns us to turn away from turning every single act into its own literary genre, that not every single communicative act should be labeled its own “literacy.” As he states, “gesture literacy,” for gestures, “visual literacy” for visual, because at that point, why are you trying to learn about the art of an emoji?
The Spectrum
Digital literacy can feel too broad, fitting under the umbrella. It reaches far beyond text and symbols into images, videos, and memes, and this is where multiliteracy enters the conversation.
In my last blog post, “The eyes that can see intertextuality,” our communication is now through memes, TikTok, podcasts, and more, showing how multiliteracy can be flexible in multiple forms. These platforms show how multiliteracy adapts like an exhausted student with only caffeine and stubbornness.
Bob the Digital Builder
Digital Literacy gives us the tools to use these spaces, while multiliteracy explains how and why we engage in them. The how – the skills, the buttons we press, the apps that we explore. While Multiliteracy is the what and why, we can explain SpongeBob memes through politics. Together, they don’t just dance, but they pull us to the dancefloor whether we are ready or not.
Leave a Reply